IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i23p16124-d991868.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Influence of Social Preference and Governments’ Strong Reciprocity on Agricultural Green Production Networks under Intensive Management in China

Author

Listed:
  • Lin Feng

    (School of Management, Jiangsu University, 301 Xuefu Road, Zhenjiang 212013, China)

  • Lingyan Xu

    (School of Management, Jiangsu University, 301 Xuefu Road, Zhenjiang 212013, China
    Research Center for Green Development and Environmental Governance, Jiangsu University, 301 Xuefu Road, Zhenjiang 212013, China)

  • Zhuoyun Zhou

    (School of Management, Jiangsu University, 301 Xuefu Road, Zhenjiang 212013, China)

  • Jianguo Du

    (School of Management, Jiangsu University, 301 Xuefu Road, Zhenjiang 212013, China
    Research Center for Green Development and Environmental Governance, Jiangsu University, 301 Xuefu Road, Zhenjiang 212013, China)

  • Dandan Wang

    (School of Management, Jiangsu University, 301 Xuefu Road, Zhenjiang 212013, China)

Abstract

This paper focuses on the sustainable development path of agricultural production in China under the pattern of intensive management, which aims to promote the agricultural green production networks consisting of new agricultural operators and traditional farmers. Based on these, this paper explores the evolution of agricultural green production networks through analyzing three interactive relationships among new agricultural operators and traditional farmers and constructing evolutionary game models on complex networks considering social preference and governments’ strong reciprocity, respectively. Then, the evolutionary stability strategies of these six evolutionary game models are analyzed, and the simulation of the evolution process of agricultural green production networks in different scenarios by MATLAB are realized. The results show that: (1) The evolutionary results of agricultural green production networks are positively correlated with the extra net profit of agricultural production operators. (2) If the extra net profit is positive, traditional farmers are more likely to adopt stable strategy of agricultural green production than new agricultural operators, while a few new agricultural operators would like to adopt the strategy of agricultural green production even though the extra net profit is low or negative. (3) The effect of social preference and governments’ strong reciprocity shows heterogeneity on the emergence of agricultural green production networks. When the net profit is enhanced, agricultural production operators with competitive preference would adopt the strategy of agricultural green production more quickly, as well as those agricultural production operators with social preference as governments’ strong reciprocity strengthened. As such, this paper suggests that it should be necessary to improve the net profit of agricultural green production by reducing costs and increasing benefits, encouraging agricultural production operators to cooperate in the agricultural green production networks to learn and share their green production experience.

Suggested Citation

  • Lin Feng & Lingyan Xu & Zhuoyun Zhou & Jianguo Du & Dandan Wang, 2022. "The Influence of Social Preference and Governments’ Strong Reciprocity on Agricultural Green Production Networks under Intensive Management in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-29, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:23:p:16124-:d:991868
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/23/16124/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/23/16124/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Abdul-Rahaman, Awal & Abdulai, Awudu, 2018. "Do farmer groups impact on farm yield and efficiency of smallholder farmers? Evidence from rice farmers in northern Ghana," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 95-105.
    2. Hermans, Frans & Sartas, Murat & van Schagen, Boudy & van Asten, Piet & Schut, Marc, 2017. "Social network analysis of multi-stakeholder platforms in agricultural research for development: Opportunities and constraints for innovation and scaling," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 12(2), pages 1-21.
    3. Herbert Gintis, 2000. "Strong Reciprocity and Human Sociality," UMASS Amherst Economics Working Papers 2000-02, University of Massachusetts Amherst, Department of Economics.
    4. Matin Qaim, 2020. "Role of New Plant Breeding Technologies for Food Security and Sustainable Agricultural Development," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 42(2), pages 129-150, June.
    5. Yingchao Li & Zhiyuan Fan & Guanghui Jiang & Zhuo Quan, 2021. "Addressing the Differences in Farmers’ Willingness and Behavior Regarding Developing Green Agriculture—A Case Study in Xichuan County, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-12, March.
    6. Borkhani, Fatemeh Razzaghi & Rezvanfar, Ahmad & Fami, Hossein Shabanali & Pouratashi, Mahtab, 2013. "Social Factors Influencing Adoption of Integrated Pest Management (IPM) Technologies by Paddy Farmers," International Journal of Agricultural Management and Development (IJAMAD), Iranian Association of Agricultural Economics, vol. 3(3), pages 1-8, September.
    7. Yingxin Chen & Jing Zhang & Pandu R. Tadikamalla & Xutong Gao, 2019. "The Relationship among Government, Enterprise, and Public in Environmental Governance from the Perspective of Multi-Player Evolutionary Game," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(18), pages 1-17, September.
    8. Haicong Li & Lu Wang & Jianzhou Gong & A-Xing Zhu & Yueming Hu, 2021. "Land-Use Modes of the Dike–Pond System in the Pearl River Delta of China and Implications for Rural Revitalization," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-20, April.
    9. Yang, Huan & Klerkx, Laurens & Leeuwis, Cees, 2014. "Functions and limitations of farmer cooperatives as innovation intermediaries: Findings from China," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 115-125.
    10. Mingjun Deng & Guocheng Xiang & Shuntian Yao, 2018. "The Effectiveness of the Multilateral Coalition to Develop a Green Agricultural Products Market in China Based on a TU Cooperative Game Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-17, May.
    11. Lingyan Xu & Zhuoyun Zhou & Jianguo Du, 2020. "An Evolutionary Game Model for the Multi-Agent Co-Governance of Agricultural Non-Point Source Pollution Control under Intensive Management Pattern in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(7), pages 1-19, April.
    12. Qiu, Tongwei & Shi, Xinjie & He, Qinying & Luo, Biliang, 2021. "The paradox of developing agricultural mechanization services in China: Supporting or kicking out smallholder farmers?," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    13. Jianguo Du & Zhuoyun Zhou & Lingyan Xu, 2020. "Evolutionary Game Mechanism on Complex Networks of Green Agricultural Production under Intensive Management Pattern," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2020, pages 1-13, March.
    14. Lingjuan Cheng & Wei Zou & Kaifeng Duan, 2021. "The Influence of New Agricultural Business Entities on the Economic Welfare of Farmer’s Families," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-15, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Wen Xiang & Jianzhong Gao, 2023. "Do Not Be Anticlimactic: Farmers’ Behavior in the Sustainable Application of Green Agricultural Technology—A Perceived Value and Government Support Perspective," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-24, January.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Shouhong Xie & Jizhou Zhang & Xiaojing Li & Zhe Chen & Xiaoning Zhang & Xianli Xia, 2023. "Impact of Farmer Participation in Production Chain Outsourcing Services on Agricultural Output Level and Output Risk: Evidence from the Guanzhong Plain, China," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-18, December.
    2. Blazquez-Soriano, Amparo & Ramos-Sandoval, Rosmery, 2022. "Information transfer as a tool to improve the resilience of farmers against the effects of climate change: The case of the Peruvian National Agrarian Innovation System," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 200(C).
    3. Christine Clavien & Colby J Tanner & Fabrice Clément & Michel Chapuisat, 2012. "Choosy Moral Punishers," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(6), pages 1-6, June.
    4. Markose Chekol Zewdie & Michele Moretti & Daregot Berihun Tenessa & Zemen Ayalew Ayele & Jan Nyssen & Enyew Adgo Tsegaye & Amare Sewnet Minale & Steven Van Passel, 2021. "Agricultural Technical Efficiency of Smallholder Farmers in Ethiopia: A Stochastic Frontier Approach," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-17, March.
    5. Friedel Bolle & Jessica Kaehler, 2006. "Coleman's Hypothesis on trusting behaviour and a remark on meta-studies," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(4), pages 469-483.
    6. Stéphan Marette & John Beghin & Anne‐Célia Disdier & Eliza Mojduszka, 2023. "Can foods produced with new plant engineering techniques succeed in the marketplace? A case study of apples," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 45(1), pages 414-435, March.
    7. Vincent Smith & Justus H. H. Wesseler & David Zilberman, 2021. "New Plant Breeding Technologies: An Assessment of the Political Economy of the Regulatory Environment and Implications for Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-18, March.
    8. Anxin Xu & Chenwen Wei & Manhua Zheng & Lili Sun & Decong Tang, 2022. "Influence of Perceived Value on Repurchase Intention of Green Agricultural Products: From the Perspective of Multi-Group Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-17, November.
    9. John B. Davis, 2013. "Identity," Chapters, in: Luigino Bruni & Stefano Zamagni (ed.), Handbook on the Economics of Reciprocity and Social Enterprise, chapter 19, pages 201-207, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    10. Basov, S., 2001. "An Evolutionary Model of Reciprocity," Department of Economics - Working Papers Series 812, The University of Melbourne.
    11. Zoltán Lakner & Brigitta Plasek & Gyula Kasza & Anna Kiss & Sándor Soós & Ágoston Temesi, 2021. "Towards Understanding the Food Consumer Behavior–Food Safety–Sustainability Triangle: A Bibliometric Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-23, November.
    12. Falk, Armin & Menrath, Ingo & Verde, Pablo Emilio & Siegrist, Johannes, 2011. "Cardiovascular Consequences of Unfair Pay," IZA Discussion Papers 5720, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    13. Guzmán, Ricardo Andrés & Rodríguez-Sickert, Carlos & Rowthorn, Robert, 2006. "When in Rome, do as the Romans do: the coevolution of altruistic punishment, conformist learning, and cooperation," MPRA Paper 2037, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Aras Türkoğlu & Kamil Haliloğlu & Metin Tosun & Piotr Szulc & Fatih Demirel & Barış Eren & Henryk Bujak & Halit Karagöz & Marek Selwet & Güller Özkan & Gniewko Niedbała, 2023. "Sodium Azide as a Chemical Mutagen in Wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.): Patterns of the Genetic and Epigenetic Effects with iPBS and CRED-iPBS Techniques," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-15, June.
    15. Mengjie Tian & Mingyong Hong & Ji Wang, 2023. "Land resources, market-oriented reform and high-quality agricultural development," Economic Change and Restructuring, Springer, vol. 56(6), pages 4165-4197, December.
    16. David Masclet & Marie-Claire Villeval, 2006. "Punishment, Inequality and Emotions," Working Papers 0604, Groupe d'Analyse et de Théorie Economique Lyon St-Étienne (GATE Lyon St-Étienne), Université de Lyon.
    17. Andreas Nicklisch & Tobias Salz, 2008. "Reciprocity and status in a virtual field experiment," Discussion Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods 2008_37, Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods.
    18. Stefania Ottone, 2008. "Are people Samaritans or Avengers?," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 3(10), pages 1-3.
    19. Jayson Beckman & Maros Ivanic & Jeremy Jelliffe, 2022. "Market impacts of Farm to Fork: Reducing agricultural input usage," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 44(4), pages 1995-2013, December.
    20. Wenke Wang & Xiaoqiong You & Kebei Liu & Yenchun Jim Wu & Daming You, 2020. "Implementation of a Multi-Agent Carbon Emission Reduction Strategy under the Chinese Dual Governance System: An Evolutionary Game Theoretical Approach," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(22), pages 1-21, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:23:p:16124-:d:991868. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.